Project description:BackgroundMedication reviews aim to support patients who take medicines, and they are often led by pharmacists. There are different types of medication reviews undertaken in various settings. Previous research undertaken in 2015 found mixed evidence that medication reviews in community settings improve clinical outcomes, but further work needs to be undertaken to establish their impact on patient-orientated and economic outcomes.AimThis scoping review aims to explore the extent and range of systematic reviews of medication reviews conducted by pharmacists, the nature of the intervention, the evidence for effectiveness, and reported research gaps.MethodSystematic reviews were included irrespective of participants, settings or outcomes and were excluded if pharmacists did not lead the delivery of the included interventions. Data extracted included the design of included studies, population, setting, main results, description of interventions, and future research recommendations.ResultsWe identified twenty-four systematic reviews that reported that medication review interventions were diverse, and their nature was often poorly described. Two high-quality reviews reported that there was evidence of no effect on mortality; of these one reported an improvement in medicines-related problems (all studies reported an increase of identified problems), and another a reduction in hospital readmissions (Risk ratio 0.93 [95% CI 0.89, 0.98]). Other lower-quality reviews reported evidence supporting intervention effectiveness for some clinical outcomes (odds ratio: achieving diabetes control = 3.11 95% prediction intervals (PI), 1.48-6.52, achieving blood pressure target = 2.73, 95% PI, 1.05-7.083.50).ConclusionThere is mixed evidence of effectiveness for medication reviews across settings and patient populations. There is limited data about the implementation of medication reviews, therefore is difficult to ascertain which components of the intervention lead to improved outcomes. As medication reviews are widely implemented in practice, further research should explore the nature of the interventions, linking the components of these to outcomes.
Project description:This study reports the process of telephonic medication reviews conducted by community pharmacists for patients with asthma. The study occurred at an independent community chain in association with a Missouri Medicaid consulting group. Participants were identified utilizing claims data and met the National Quality Forum criteria for uncontrolled moderate-to-severe persistent asthma. A pharmacist performed the initial encounter via telephone which included a knowledge questionnaire, symptom control assessment, and medication review. Pharmacists identified drug-related problems (DRPs) and faxed recommendations to patients' primary care providers (PCPs). Thirty days later, pharmacists called to follow up with the patients and faxed PCPs to resolve any outstanding DRPs, new DRPs, or recommendations. Questionnaire scores and symptom control assessments were compared and analyzed utilizing a paired t-test, Chi-squared test, or Fisher's exact test. The number and categories of DRPs, recommendations made by pharmacists, and intervention time were reported. Fourteen participants completed initial encounters with twelve completing follow-up. The majority answered 'yes' to at least one symptom control assessment question indicating partially controlled to uncontrolled asthma. The average knowledge assessment score was 5.17 out of 7 initially and 5.42 for the follow-up. Pharmacists identified 43 DRPs and made 41 recommendations with a mean intervention time of 65 min.
Project description:AimsThe aim of this meta-analysis is to examine the impact of in-hospital pharmacist-led medication reviews in paediatric and adult patients.MethodsRelevant studies were identified from the Medline and Cochrane Library databases. Studies were included if they met the following criteria (without any language or date restrictions): design: randomized controlled trial; intervention: in-hospital pharmacist-led medication review (experimental group) vs. usual care (control group); participants: paediatric or adult population. The primary outcome was all-cause readmissions and/or emergency department (ED) visits at different time points. The secondary outcomes were all-cause readmissions, all-cause ED visits, drug-related readmissions, mortality, length of hospital stay, adherence and quality of life. We calculated the relative risk (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each study. We used fixed and/or random effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.ResultsWe systematically reviewed 19 randomized controlled trials (4805 participants). The readmission rates did not differ between the experimental group and the control group (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.89; 1.05, p = 0.470). The secondary outcomes did not differ between the two groups, except for in drug-related readmissions, which were lower in the experimental group (RR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.14; 0.45, p < 0.001), and all-cause ED visits (RR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59; 0.85 p = 0.001).ConclusionThe low-quality evidence in this analysis suggests an impact of pharmacist-led medication reviews on drug-related readmissions and all-cause ED visits. Few studies reported on adherence and quality of life. More high-quality randomized clinical trials are needed to assess the impact of pharmacist-led medication reviews on patient-relevant outcomes, including adherence and quality of life.
Project description:Background and objectivesMedication safety events are predominant contributors to suboptimal graft outcomes in kidney transplant recipients. The goal of this study was to examine the efficacy of improving medication safety through a pharmacist-led, mobile health-based intervention.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsThis was a 12-month, single-center, prospective, parallel, two-arm, single-blind, randomized controlled trial. Adult kidney recipients 6-36 months post-transplant were eligible. Participants randomized to intervention received supplemental clinical pharmacist-led medication therapy monitoring and management via a mobile health-based application, integrated with risk-guided televisits and home-based BP and glucose monitoring. The application provided an accurate medication regimen, timely reminders, and side effect surveys. Both the control and intervention arms received usual care, including serial laboratory monitoring and regular clinic visits. The coprimary outcomes were to assess the incidence and severity of medication errors and adverse events.ResultsIn total, 136 kidney transplant recipients were included, 68 in each arm. The mean age was 51 years, 57% were male, and 64% were Black individuals. Participants receiving the intervention experienced a significant reduction in medication errors (61% reduction in the risk rate; incident risk ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.28 to 0.55; P<0.001) and a significantly lower incidence risk of Grade 3 or higher adverse events (incident risk ratio, 0.55, 95% confidence interval, 0.30 to 0.99; P=0.05). For the secondary outcome of hospitalizations, the intervention arm demonstrated significantly lower rates of hospitalizations (incident risk ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.27 to 0.77; P=0.005).ConclusionsWe demonstrated a significant reduction in medication errors, adverse events, and hospitalizations using a pharmacist-led, mobile health-based intervention.
Project description:Aim of the studyThis prospective, controlled trial aimed to assess the effect of pharmacist-led medication reviews on the medication safety of psychiatric inpatients by the resolution of Drug-Related Problems (DRP). Both the therapy appropriateness measured with the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and the number of unsolved DRP per patient were chosen as primary outcome measures.MethodsDepending on their time of admission, 269 psychiatric patients that were admitted to a psychiatric university hospital were allocated in control (09/2012-03/2013) or intervention group (05/2013-12/2013). In both groups, DRP were identified by comprehensive medication reviews by clinical pharmacists at admission, during the hospital stay, and at discharge. In the intervention group, recommendations for identified DRP were compiled by the pharmacists and discussed with the therapeutic team. In the control group, recommendations were not provided except for serious or life threatening DRP. As a primary outcome measure, the changes in therapy appropriateness from admission to discharge as well as from admission to three months after discharge (follow-up) assessed with the MAI were compared between both groups. The second primary outcome was the number of unsolved DRP per patient after completing the study protocol. The DRP type, the relevance and the potential of drugs to cause DRP were also evaluated.ResultsThe intervention led to a reduced MAI score by 1.4 points per patient (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.8-2.0) at discharge and 1.3 points (95% CI: 0.7-1.9) at follow-up compared with controls. The number of unsolved DRP in the intervention group was 1.8 (95% CI: 1.5-2.1) less than in control.ConclusionThe pharmaceutical medication reviews with interdisciplinary discussion of identified DRP appears to be a worthy strategy to improve medication safety in psychiatry as reflected by less unsolved DRP per patient and an enhanced appropriateness of therapy. The promising results of this trial likely warrant further research that evaluates direct clinical outcomes and health-related costs.Trial registrationDeutsches Register Klinischer Studien (DRKS), DRKS00006358.
Project description:BackgroundMedication treatment can reduce morbidity but can also cause drug-related problems (DRPs). One method to identify and solve DRPs is medication reviews (MRs) that are aimed at increased patient safety and quality in drug treatment. In Skåne county, Sweden, a well-established multi-professional model for MRs in nursing homes is practiced. However, a demand for MRs regarding community-dwelling patients has emerged. These patients may be extra vulnerable since they have less supervision from healthcare personnel.AimTo describe the community-dwelling patients in primary healthcare considered in need of an MR, as well as the outcomes of these pharmacist-led MRs.MethodsPersonnel from 14 primary healthcare centers selected patients for the MRs. Based on electronic medical records, the symptom assessment tool PHASE-20 (PHArmacotherapeutical Symptom Evaluation 20 questions) and medication lists, pharmacists conducted MRs and communicated adjustment suggestions via the medical record to the general practitioners (GPs).ResultsA total of 109 patients were included in the study and 90.8% (n = 99) of the patients were exposed to at least one DRP, with an average of 3.9 DRPs per patient. Patients with impaired renal function (glomerular filtration rate, GFR < 45 ml/min) or ≥ 10 medications were exposed to a significantly higher number of DRPs per patient, 5.1 DRP and 5.3 respectively. The most frequent DRP-categories were Unnecessary drug therapy and Adverse drug reaction, which represented 23.0% respectively 22.9% of the total amount of DRPs.ConclusionsOur results indicate a prioritized need for MRs for community-dwelling patients, specifically with impaired renal function or polypharmacy.
Project description:Pharmacist-led medication reviews have been shown to improve medication management, reducing the adverse effects of polypharmacy among older adults. This paper quantitatively examines the medications, medication discrepancies and drug therapy problems of recipients in primary care. A convenience sample of 16 primary care team pharmacists in Ontario, Canada contributed data for patients with whom they conducted a medication review over a prior four-week period. Data were uploaded using electronic data capture forms and descriptive analyses were completed. Two hundred and thirty-seven patients (on average, 67.9 years old) were included in the study, taking an average of 9.2 prescription medications ( ± 4.7). Majority of these patients (83.5%) were categorized as polypharmacy patients taking at least five or more prescribed drugs per day. Just over half of the patients were classified as having a low level of medication complexity (52.3%). Pharmacists identified 2.1 medication discrepancies ( ± 3.9) and 3.6 drug therapy problems per patient ( ± 2.8). Half these patients had more than one medication discrepancy and almost every patient had a drug therapy problem identified. Medication reviews conducted by pharmacists in primary care teams minimized medication discrepancies and addressed drug therapy problems to improve medication management and reduce adverse events that may result from polypharmacy.
Project description:AimTo evaluate the impact of a telemedicine medication management service in patients with hypertension.MethodsParticipants were allocated to either a telemedicine service (N = 173) or usual care (UC) (N = 179). The primary outcome was blood pressure (BP) reduction from baseline to the 6-month follow-up visit, the proportion of the target BP achievement, overall adherence to prescribed medication as well as a composite of non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death.ResultsAt 6 months, BP was controlled in 89.6% (n = 155) of intervention patients and 78.8% (n = 141) of UC patients (OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.04-1.25, P = 0.006), giving a mean difference of -6.0 (-13.0 to -2.5 mmHg) and -2.0 mmHg (-4.0 to -0.1 mmHg) in SBP and DBP, respectively. 17.9% (n = 31) of the patients in the intervention group were non-adherent with medications, compared with 29.1% (n = 52) in the UC group (P = 0.014). The composite clinical endpoints were reached by 2.9% in the intervention group and 4.5% in the control group with no significant differences (OR = 1.566, 95% CI = 0.528-4.646).ConclusionTelemedicine medication management for hypertension management had led to better BP control and medication adherence improvement than UC during COVID-19 epidemic, resulting in a reduction of overall adverse cardiovascular events occurrence.
Project description:IntroductionAdherence to medications for cardiovascular disease and its risk factors is less than optimal, although greater adherence to medication has been shown to reduce the risk factors for cardiovascular disease. This paper examines the economics of tailored pharmacy interventions to improve medication adherence for cardiovascular disease prevention and management.MethodsLiterature from inception of databases to May 2019 was searched, yielding 29 studies for cardiovascular disease prevention and 9 studies for cardiovascular disease management. Analyses were done from June 2019 through May 2020. All monetary values are in 2019 U.S. dollars.ResultsThe median intervention cost per patient per year was $246 for cardiovascular disease prevention and $292 for cardiovascular disease management. The median change in healthcare cost per person per year due to the intervention was -$355 for cardiovascular disease prevention and -$2,430 for cardiovascular disease management. The median total cost per person per year was -$89 for cardiovascular disease prevention, with a median return on investment of 0.01. The median total cost per person per year for cardiovascular disease management was -$1,080, with a median return on investment of 7.52, and 6 of 7 estimates indicating reduced healthcare cost averted exceeded intervention cost. For cardiovascular disease prevention, the median cost per quality-adjusted life year gained was $11,298. There were no cost effectiveness studies for cardiovascular disease management.DiscussionThe evidence shows that tailored pharmacy-based interventions to improve medication adherence are cost effective for cardiovascular disease prevention. For cardiovascular disease management, healthcare cost averted exceeds the cost of implementation for a favorable return on investment from a healthcare systems perspective.
Project description:IntroductionHealth disparities in African-American (AA) kidney transplant recipients compared with non-AA recipients are well established. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk control is a significant mediator of this disparity.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of improved medication safety, CVD risk control, and racial disparities in kidney transplant recipients.MethodsProspective, pharmacist-led, technology-aided, 6-month interventional clinical trial. A total of 60 kidney recipients with diabetes and hypertension were enrolled. Patients had to be at least one-year post transplant with stable graft function. Primary outcome measured included hypertension, diabetes, and lipid control using intent-to-treat analyses, with differences assessed between AA and non-AA recipients.ResultsThe participants mean age was 59 years, with 42% being female and 68% being AA. Overall, patients demonstrated improvements in blood pressure <140/90 mmHg (baseline 50% vs. end of study 68%, p=0.054) and hemoglobin A1c <7% (baseline 33% vs. end of study 47%, p=0.061). AAs demonstrated a significant reduction from baseline in systolic blood pressure (-0.86 mmHg per month, p=0.026), which was not evident in non-AAs (-0.13 mmHg per month, p=0.865). Mean HgbA1c decreased from baseline in the overall group (-0.12% per month, p=0.003), which was similar within AAs (-0.11% per month, p=0.004) and non-AAs (-0.14% per month, p=0.029). There were no changes in low-density lipoproteins, triglycerides, or high-density lipoproteins over the course of the study. Medication errors were significantly reduced and self-reported medication adherence significantly improved over the course of the study.ConclusionThese results demonstrate the potential efficacy of a pharmacist-led, technology-aided, educational intervention in improving medication safety, diabetes, and hypertension and reducing racial disparities in AA kidney transplant recipients. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02763943).